S&F! anyone ever heard of MU the motherland? I've stimbled across this before. Not sayin' it's real or anything, but this thread reminded me of MU.
Hopefully this will reach the right people. just search up Mu the motherland on google. there should be a free movie and some other info for anyone
who is interested.

If you've read my posts then you know that I do not dismiss theories. I dismiss ludicrous, baseless claims or ideas as you've put it. I do not
scoff. I put forward a reason that I dispute the claims. And I do provide proof when asked.

I would point out that in this thread I made it clear that there are open areas on Antarctica where there is little ice or snow. That is something
that seems to have been overlooked. The entire continent is not covered by endless thick ice sheets. If I wanted to simply scoff at these claims I'd
have avoided mentioning that fact.

so what evidence do you want?
1. The first civilizations were in warm climates?
2. Antarctica has been an impossible agricultural place for millennia?
3. That Antarctic ocean is a dangerous route to navigate?

Let's do all 3.

Part 1. Notice that the warm climate was first. Other places listed at this website include other warm areas. Cradle of Civilization

This postulates that there is no single "cradle", but several independent developments of civilization, of which the Near Eastern Neolithic
was the first.

Here in part 2 we learn that Antarctica has been a frozen land isolated from other continents for at least 20 million years. Plate Tectonics

The climate of modern Antarctica is extreme. Located over the South Pole and in total darkness for six months of the year, the continent is covered by
glacial ice to depths in excess of 3 km in places. Yet this has not always been the case. 50 Ma ago, even though Antarctica was in more or less the
same position over the pole, the climate was much more temperate – there were no glaciers and the continent was covered with lush vegetation and
forests. So how did this extreme change come about?

The modern climate of Antarctica depends upon its complete isolation from the rest of the planet as a consequence of the Antarctic Circumpolar Current
that completely encircles Antarctica and gives rise to the stormy region of the Southern Ocean known as the roaring forties. The onset of this current
is related to the opening of seaways between obstructing continents. Antarctica and South America were once joined together as part of Gondwana and
were the last parts of this original supercontinent to separate. By reconstructing continental positions from magnetic and other features of the sea
floor in this region, geologists have shown that the Drake Passage opened in three phases between 50 Ma and 20 Ma, as illustrated in Figure 32. At 50
Ma there was possibly a shallow seaway between Antarctica and South America, but both continents were moving together. At 34 Ma the seaway was still
narrow, but differential movement between the Antarctic and South American Plates created a deeper channel between the two continents that began to
allow deep ocean water to circulate around the continent. Finally, at 20 Ma there was a major shift in local plate boundaries that allowed the rapid
development of a deep-water channel between the two continental masses.

Today, the Antarctic Circumpolar Current is the strongest deep ocean current and its strength is responsible for the ‘icehouse’ climate
that grips the planet. The opening of the Drake Passage had both a local and a global effect, initially cooling the climate of Antarctica from
temperate to cold and ultimately playing an important role in the change from global ‘greenhouse’ conditions 50 Ma ago to the global
‘icehouse’ of today.

Sea-temperatures vary from about −2 to 10 °C (28 to 50 °F). Cyclonic storms travel eastward around the continent and frequently become
intense because of the temperature-contrast between ice and open ocean. The ocean-area from about latitude 40 south to the Antarctic Circle has the
strongest average winds found anywhere on Earth. In winter the ocean freezes outward to 65 degrees south latitude in the Pacific sector and 55 degrees
south latitude in the Atlantic sector, lowering surface temperatures well below 0 degrees Celsius; at some coastal points intense persistent drainage
winds from the interior keep the shoreline ice-free throughout the winter.

huge icebergs with drafts up to several hundred meters; smaller bergs and iceberg fragments; sea ice (generally 0.5 to 1 meter thick) with
sometimes dynamic short-term variations and with large annual and interannual variations; deep continental shelf floored by glacial deposits varying
widely over short distances; high winds and large waves much of the year; ship icing, especially May-October; most of region is remote from sources of
search and rescue

There is also evidence this was the case 250.000 years ago and according to the sources I found even as recent as 2000 to 4000 years ago.

It's completely laughable to think that Antarctica was ice free even a million years ago. It has been a cold wasteland at least 20 million years. See
my previous post.

You asked me for evidence for all of my claims. Now I'd like to see your evidence for these claims. If it is Hancock or Hapgood just state their
name. That's good enough for me to know that the evidence is worthless.

How disappointing you assume it comes from Hancock or whatever, without taking a look at the source I provided.
Don't get me wrong. You are more then welcome to disproof the source.
ATS has a big name when it comes to filter out the truth from the rubbish. It is in fact a reason for me post things where I know, I can not proof
right from wrong.

As I said, not everybody knows what you know.
It seems that you do not even try to learn what others have to offer that you might not know.

If you decide to actually look and you can proof the source is wrong or a hoax. I'm going to be the first one to thank you.

Serbstra was also kind enough to post an additional source for the 250.000 years.

Ohh... I don't remember anyone of the sources talking about the entire continent.
Which makes sense because we know for a fact that the ice sheet is at least as old as the ice core samples tell us at the dozen or so place they were
taken from the ice.

What you done is not link directly to the evidence you reference. You provided a link that has to be clicked, which leads to many possible links which
have to be clicked.

Try to be a little less indirect. It makes it less likely to cause confusion.

There are multiple places talking about a warmer Antarctica. Is this the one you are interested in: When The Antarctic Was Warm
This is just an opinion piece based on an article. Or maybe you were referring to one of the other links to links to links.

How do we know what would cause the Ocean Conveyor Belt to stop? The Younger Dryas period of colder temperatures, which occurred about 12
thousand years ago, occurred because of the shutdown of the Ocean Conveyor Belt (Joyce 2007). In An Inconvenient Truth, Al Gore states that the ocean
overturning ceased because of the melted glaciers in modern-day Canada and the United States (now the Great Lakes), which spilled over into the North
Atlantic, which is a critical region of overturning

Warm and cold water will stop moving.
This would effect global currents, right ?

The sea current that circles Antarctica has got to be effected as well. It also stopped or slowed down or there could be some kind of interaction with
the other oceans.

Warmer waters could have flowed all the way to land for example.

Temperature change for the past 150,000 years at the VOSTOK site in Antarctica, based on the deuterium proxy found in ice cores.

In the picture you can see at the right pink column. The average temperature lies close or around 0 degrees Celsius. With a high rise 9000 or 8000
years ago.
These temperatures are measured at or near lake Vostok. Which is a long way from South Africa and even further from South America. Not to mention
pretty far inland.

Especially when sea level was lower back then.

These are averages and this mean that 200 maybe 300 years or so the weather could allow some agriculture. Inuit lived on a diet of sea food and
thrived..

Records show Antarctica usually does the opposite of the Arctic in big lines. So to say.

The thermohaline circulation abruptly stopped around 11.000 years ago in the younger dryas period. ( Large amounts of freshwater in the northern ice
sea probably because of the melting land ice decreased the salinity of the water to a point it did not sink anymore ) caused a warming in the
Southern ice sea up to 3 degrees. That is a huge change. This could get the summer temperature high enough for a while.

Our civilization only exists since the black plague diminished Europe and we basically had to start over. But for the colonization of man to a point
they can be compared to the Minoans for example could happen faster.

i don't think you are realizing just how much ice is layered upon layered, down there.

ice that is building up at an excruciatingly slow rate!

like i said, we don't know for sure, absolutely
but we do have to take into consideration certain things which are established according to a few things that we do know nearly if not all the way
absolutely.

sciencedaily.com says that Antarctica covers an area of almost 14 million
square km and contains 30 million cubic km of ice.

like has already been mentioned, there are parts of Antarctica that are free from snow and ice - and when times of de-glaciation occurs, it doesn't
mean that all the ice must be gone, either.

What IO meant about opinion is that this statement does not attempt to report on the article but makes comments about the article such as "A somewhat
politically incorrect observation appears in this article." There is also the comment at the end.

To link to this article is the same as linking to one of my own posts even if I contain a link to an article. Getting to the original article is
important.

Here is the link that might be the link that you were interested in that was linked to by a link in the OP. When The Antarctic Was Warm

The analyses of ocean-floor sediments deposited recently by melting Antarctic ice sheets reveal that these ice sheets are only about 2,000
years old.

Ocean-floor sediments drilled from Antarctic regions recently covered by ice shelves suggest that those shelves were only 2,000 years old. This
finding could compel scientists to reassess whether the current destruction of polar ice is due primarily to human-caused global warming.

That's a very different take on the article isn't it? That is why I say opinion. It seems that the warm Antarctic opinion piece was a huge mistake
in it. It says, "these ice sheets are only about 2,000 years old." No, no, no.

The original article never says that. What it says is that there is evidence that the channel between the Antarctic Peninsula and James Ross Island
may have been open 2000 years ago. That does not mean there was open land. When the glaciers cover up that open area, the ice that does it does not
have to be 2000 years old. It is very old ice that slides out and covers up the open waters. That's the difference between permanent ice and
glaciers: glaciers move.

Again from the Antarctic sediments link.

Their analysis suggests that from about 2,000 to 5,000 years ago, much of the channel was seasonally open water.

Sediment cores have been collected from the ocean bottom in an area, just north of Larsen B, exposed by ice-shelf disintegrations in the early
1990s. The cores indicate that the shelf there was only about 2,000 years old (SN: 9/8/01, p. 150:
www.sciencenews.org...). However, a preliminary analysis of sediment layers in cores taken in December 2001 from
seafloor near Larsen B suggests that this shelf has been in place for more than 12,000 years, says Eugene W. Domack, a marine geologist at Hamilton
College in Clinton, N.Y. He'll present those results at an international workshop on Antarctic climate variability hosted by his college next
week.

It appears that before and after this period, the channel remained closed. The period when the channel was open coincides
with a period of local warming supported by data gathered from land-based studies of lake sediments and ancient, abandoned penguin
rookeries. With the return of colder conditions about 1900 years ago, the Prince Gustav ice shelf reformed until its recent
retreat.

It seems that this was a local event affecting the covered water portion of the Antarctic ice. And it was a short-lived event.

It is not clear that the Piri Reis map shows Antarctica. It shows a continuously connected landmass of South America. The northern part appears to be
South America. Where is the ocean that separates South America from Antarctica?

Maybe a lower sea level created a landbridge once which has been destroyed do to natural cataclysmic event(s).

There is still no explanation of the similarities between the new and old world or the easter island people.

Piri the Turkish admiral who owned that map apparently said himself it is a map composed from even older maps that were once kept save in museums of
the old world.
Unfortunately they are destroyed in fires.

It is likely it could just be a mistake from the last person who copied it or a piece or of the whole map.

Mu is short for Lemuria.
it was the civilization before Atlantis - it was several hundred thousand years ago.
it was in the Pacific Ocean - or rather where there is now the Pacific Ocean.
Right in the middle of the ring of fire.
I think where the Solomon Islands are there are some ruins barely underwater - left from Mu, i think.
so were those strange underwater pyramids and other stone monuments off the coast of Japan - i forget the name but someone will know.

that is where the Asian, Easter Island, Hawaiian/South Pacific, Incan and predecessors, etc came from.

that is why the somewhat similarities between them, that are still left.

so the truth of it is, no matter where Atlantis was, when it was, it was a descendant of Lemuria, and so we are descendants of both Atlantis and Mu.

This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.